Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You and Your Team.

Learn More →

Interobserver Variability in Interpreting Chest Radiographs-Reply

Interobserver Variability in Interpreting Chest Radiographs-Reply Abstract in reply Clark and Conrad raise several points of concern about our recent article.1 The first point is that even though the number and percentage of correct responses for the roentgenographic diagnosis of pneumonia improve with increasing experience (Table 2), we conclude the opposite. Perhaps one of our statements in the conclusions in the abstract was too strong: "This [interobserver] variability does not improve with increasing experience." Instead, the final sentence in the "Comment" section is more appropriate: "This variability only slightly decreases with increasing experience."The next point is that discrepancy in the study design might invalidate the study's conclusions. Consecutive patients admitted to our hospital with pneumonia formed the study cohort; the fact that they were elderly and had a high incidence of concomitant disease reflects reality for patients who are now admitted to hospital with pneumonia. There is no doubt that this represents a severe test References 1. Young M, Marrie TJ. Interobserver variability in the interpretation of chest roentgenograms of patients with possible pneumonia. Arch Intern Med . 1994; 154:2729-2732.Crossref http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Archives of Internal Medicine American Medical Association

Interobserver Variability in Interpreting Chest Radiographs-Reply

Archives of Internal Medicine , Volume 155 (13) – Jul 10, 1995

Interobserver Variability in Interpreting Chest Radiographs-Reply

Abstract

Abstract in reply Clark and Conrad raise several points of concern about our recent article.1 The first point is that even though the number and percentage of correct responses for the roentgenographic diagnosis of pneumonia improve with increasing experience (Table 2), we conclude the opposite. Perhaps one of our statements in the conclusions in the abstract was too strong: "This [interobserver] variability does not improve with increasing experience." Instead, the final sentence...
Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-medical-association/interobserver-variability-in-interpreting-chest-radiographs-reply-w097V9G5f0
Publisher
American Medical Association
Copyright
Copyright © 1995 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.
ISSN
0003-9926
eISSN
1538-3679
DOI
10.1001/archinte.1995.00430130149021
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Abstract in reply Clark and Conrad raise several points of concern about our recent article.1 The first point is that even though the number and percentage of correct responses for the roentgenographic diagnosis of pneumonia improve with increasing experience (Table 2), we conclude the opposite. Perhaps one of our statements in the conclusions in the abstract was too strong: "This [interobserver] variability does not improve with increasing experience." Instead, the final sentence in the "Comment" section is more appropriate: "This variability only slightly decreases with increasing experience."The next point is that discrepancy in the study design might invalidate the study's conclusions. Consecutive patients admitted to our hospital with pneumonia formed the study cohort; the fact that they were elderly and had a high incidence of concomitant disease reflects reality for patients who are now admitted to hospital with pneumonia. There is no doubt that this represents a severe test References 1. Young M, Marrie TJ. Interobserver variability in the interpretation of chest roentgenograms of patients with possible pneumonia. Arch Intern Med . 1994; 154:2729-2732.Crossref

Journal

Archives of Internal MedicineAmerican Medical Association

Published: Jul 10, 1995

References